A majestic mountain lion, wandering the peaks along the Colorado/Utah border. A strong, graceful bobcat, making his way back to his den after a meal. For me, these scenes evoke reverence for the natural world: a profound respect for the inherent value of each living being, and for each being’s rightful place in the ecosystem. For others, however, such images conjure an aggressive desire to dominate, kill, and reign supreme. Sadly, for this latter faction, the thirst for blood can be satisfied…

Image of hunter courtesy of Born Free USA.

Hunters drool at the chance to execute “big game” animals—lions, elk, antelope, and the like, including endangered and threatened species—and keep their lifeless heads as “trophies.” But, because many of these species live on other continents, or can be difficult to stalk, some hunters are willing to pay big bucks for a guaranteed kill.

How can a kill be guaranteed? Canned hunting. Wild animals are captured and fenced in, unable to escape, and a hunter pays an operator for the “opportunity” to shoot one at point-blank range. These hunts occur on private land, typically known as “ranches.” To kill a single animal, a ranch operator can charge anywhere from hundreds to thousands of dollars. continue reading…

The Government of Botswana has announced an intention to join the mounting movement across Africa in banning “canned” hunting, where wild animals, perhaps captive-bred, are slaughtered in fenced areas by pathetic “hunters.” Earlier this year, Botswana had already banned trophy hunting to preserve wild animal populations.

(Warning: Graphic images)

It takes a certain kind of cowardice to launch an arrow or explode a bullet from close proximity, blistering toward a captive, possibly drugged, incarcerated wild animal. Fences prevent fleeing. No sense of chase—“fair” or otherwise. No escape and no defense. Just appalling.

In South Africa, venue for the 2016 Meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), canned hunting is not only legal, but the industry is staunchly defended by government.

But, it’s not just an issue of a cowardly human shooting a lion for entertainment and bravado; growing evidence suggests that lion bones from canned hunting operations are being shipped from Africa to Asia as a substitute for tiger bones. Tiger bones can be illegally and fraudulently sold as lion bones; proliferation of lion bones stimulates a market for carnivore consumption, leading to more and more deaths; and the marketplace will ultimately prove fatal for tigers and lions, and so on… continue reading…

An 18-month investigation by The Indianapolis Star, led by reporter and lifelong hunter Ryan Sabalow, has pulled back the curtain on the captive hunting industry in the United States.

A deer at a captive hunting ranch looks through the fence—courtesy Humane Society Legislative Fund.

The remarkable four-part series, “Buck Fever,” exposes the breeding of “Frankenstein” deer with monstrous racks sold for tens of thousands of dollars and shot at fenced hunting preserves; the reckless practices that threaten native wildlife, livestock, and our food supply with deadly diseases; and the cost to taxpayers for multi-million dollar government eradication efforts.

The report notes that chronic wasting disease (CWD) has been found in 22 states, first detected in captive deer herds before then being found in nearby wildlife. And bovine tuberculosis has spread from deer farms to cattle in at least four states. The evidence is overwhelming, with wildlife officials citing deer escaping from farms and blending in with wild populations, and researchers in Michigan setting up remote cameras along deer fences to document nose-to-nose contact between captive and wild animals. After CWD-infected deer were found on a Missouri preserve, others were found in the wild within two miles of the pen—but nowhere else in the state. continue reading…

— Our thanks to the ALDF Blog, where this post originally appeared on November 21, 2012. Heiser is director of the ALDF’s Criminal Justice Program.

Regardless of how you voted in the presidential election, if you are someone who cares about the welfare of animals, you’ll have to agree that November 6, 2012 was a bad day at the polls.

Image courtesy ALDF Blog.

North Dakota: Serving as undeniable testimony to the tactical effectiveness of vilifying your opponent, Measure 5 failed, with 65% of the voters rejecting that notion. This proposal would have made it a felony to “maliciously and intentionally burn, poison, crush, suffocate, impale, drown, blind, skin, beat to death, drag to death, exsanguinate, disembowel, or dismember any living dog, cat or horse.” Opponents of Measure 5 seemed to take great pride in the success of their smear campaign characterizing supporters as “extremists” who were advancing a “radical agenda” while summarily ignoring that those who engage in intentional acts of aggravated animal cruelty (the conduct targeted by Measure 5) are five-times more likely to commit acts of violence against humans. The irony of the measure number is not lost on your author.

While rejecting Measure 5, the citizens of North Dakota opted to amend their state constitution by approving Measure 3, which adds Section 29 to Article XI of the North Dakota Constitution and reads: “The right of farmers and ranchers to engage in modern farming and ranching practices shall be forever guaranteed in this state. No law shall be enacted which abridges the right of farmers and ranchers to employ agricultural technology, modern livestock production and ranching practices.” Roll out the welcome mat, because those who profit from intensive confinement are likely to be interested in the safe harbor this amendment provides. Supremacy clause and federal preemption issues notwithstanding, the passage of this state constitutional amendment will most assuredly impact the debate on a federal “egg bill.” continue reading…

Controversy erupted in mid-June of this year when the show’s artistic director, film and theater director Danny Boyle, presented his plans for the ceremony and revealed that they involved re-creating a rural English setting for the audience of 80,000 (as well as the billion people expected to watch on television around the world). The plan was complete with thousands of people and real farm animals, including 12 horses, 10 chickens, 10 ducks, 2 goats, 3 cows, and 70 sheep.

The pastoral part of his theme also involves real grass and soil, plows, and a cricket team, as well as, he claimed, clouds hanging above the stadium that could provide rain. Beyond that will be the flashing, noisy, bright high-tech displays that Olympic audiences have come to expect, including fireworks. The ceremony would begin with ringing of an enormous clanging bell.

People involved in animal rights and animal welfare were immediately concerned about the animals. Ingrid Newkirk, the president of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, wrote Boyle a letter describing the risks of stressing, injuring, and traumatizing the animals:

“There are inevitably serious problems involved when it comes to using live animals in productions, and I don’t mean just aesthetically, with animals falling ill, defecating, urinating and so on.

“Animals become stressed and anxious when they are forced into unfamiliar or frightening situations, and stage sets—with their bright lights, heavy equipment and noisy crowds—are obviously traumatic environments for them.

“Then there is the transport to and from the venue, which also proves stressful as animals do not understand what is happening.

“And as for fireworks, clearly they frighten the bejesus out of animals. By contrast, the use of stunningly clever animatronics would create a show of Olympic proportions—without harming any living beings.”

She went on, “Should you opt to use real animals—and we hope you do not—please do as the producer of Babe did and ‘pay them their wages’ by making sure that they are retired to an animal sanctuary after the performance, rather than being sent back to farms and ultimately slaughtered. Your intent is to recreate our ‘green and pleasant land’ but real animals are not necessary to achieve this aspiration and, in fact, detract from it.” continue reading…

"Service Animal" Scammers (New Yorker): An increasing number of your neighbors have been keeping company with their pets in human-only establishments simply by claiming that the creatures are their licensed companion animals and are necessary to their mental well-being.